| Title |
Eye surgery in the elderly
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Clinical Interventions in Aging, April 2016
|
| DOI | 10.2147/cia.s101835 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Dorota Raczyńska, Leopold Glasner, Ewelina Serkies-Minuth, Magdalena A Wujtewicz, Kamila Mitrosz |
| Abstract |
Extending life expectancy is a human achievement. It does however entail problems. Ophthalmic treatments are widely recognized as having a low risk of general complications. A classic example is cataract surgery, considered to be one of the safest and most frequently performed surgical procedures in the world. However, advanced age brings with it risks that should be considered before surgery. Eye operations, as with procedures on other organs, are largely dependent on the quality of surgical tissues. Therefore, the elderly are at increased risk of complications. Improved general health and postoperative follow-up with the use of noninvasive technologies such as optical coherence tomography translate into lower intraoperative risk and better postoperative prognosis. In this review, we discuss the impact of general health on operational prognosis, therapeutic problems, and technical difficulties which a surgeon and anesthesiologist may encounter in the process. We also consider new technology and strategies specifically aimed at treating eye conditions in the elderly. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 68 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Switzerland | 1 | 1% |
| Canada | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 66 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 10 | 15% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 8 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 10% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 6 | 9% |
| Other | 5 | 7% |
| Other | 15 | 22% |
| Unknown | 17 | 25% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 37 | 54% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 5 | 7% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 3% |
| Computer Science | 1 | 1% |
| Social Sciences | 1 | 1% |
| Other | 3 | 4% |
| Unknown | 19 | 28% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 06 April 2016.
All research outputs
#17,286,645
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Interventions in Aging
#1,255
of 1,968 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#193,051
of 314,723 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Interventions in Aging
#31
of 53 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,968 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.1. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 314,723 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 53 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.